120-129

130-139

140+

I dont know

While some people claim to have "above" average intelligence few of them actually use it to their fullest advantage. Can they create or invent new things that are helpful or do they just try to take advantage of others less "intelligent" than they are?

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

Agreed on the "fullest".
I misquoted, what I meant to query is the underlying assumption that the "geniuses" aren't doing anything to help others/ the human race. (Would have been better off quoting the second sentence... shoot me).

Agreed on the "fullest".
I misquoted, what I meant to query is the underlying assumption that the "geniuses" aren't doing anything to help others/ the human race. (Would have been better off quoting the second sentence... shoot me).

Click to expand...

I meant that people such as Newton or Einstein could have used their abilities to come up with things much more beneficial than what they did. Not to be putting anyone down but just thinking that they only seemed to use their "abilities" in a very narrow scope. What they did was truly great but think if they could have thought outside their boxes.

Agreed on the "fullest".
I misquoted, what I meant to query is the underlying assumption that the "geniuses" aren't doing anything to help others/ the human race. (Would have been better off quoting the second sentence... shoot me).

I meant that people such as Newton or Einstein could have used their abilities to come up with things much more beneficial than what they did.

Click to expand...

Newton more or less created "science" as a discipline, Einstein gave us photo-electricity, nuclear power (and the bomb) etc etc.
Define "beneficial".

Not to be putting anyone down but just thinking that they only seemed to use their "abilities" in a very narrow scope. What they did was truly great but think if they could have thought outside their boxes.

Click to expand...

Thought outside their boxes?
They did their thinking outside of the boxes of the rest of the world...

It comes down to to:
what do you define as beneficial?
they are each one single person, working against the "drag" of mediocrity and
offsetting stupidity (i.e. for every genius there's probably a total idiot ...) of humanity.
discoveries are found, you can't sit down and say "today I will have have a flash of inspiration that will save millions".
even if the "flash" comes it has to be implemented - ever tried getting a really good idea past a dumb boss and the accounts committee?
each genius has a "preferred area" to work in - physicists don't do archaeology for example (Feynman did do do some pretty good biology though).
every one has a different idea of what helps...

I meant that people such as Newton or Einstein could have used their abilities to come up with things much more beneficial than what they did. Not to be putting anyone down but just thinking that they only seemed to use their "abilities" in a very narrow scope. What they did was truly great but think if they could have thought outside their boxes.

Click to expand...

Really.. I hate when people expect grand things from you only because you scored high on an IQ-test.

where \(2abi\) is in fact Enmoses \(a^{2}+b^{2}\) can yeild the imaginary \(i\), which is always real in a sense that it isn't actually entirely virtual, but has real effects on the universe at very small levels.

Click to expand...

In another occasion, you said: 1+1 = 0.
Also, in another occasion, you said: 1 = (0.5i)(0.5i) = -1

In another occasion, you said: 1+1 = 0.
Also, in another occasion, you said: 1 = (0.5i)(0.5i) = -1

Etc. I find it hard to believe that your IQ is 119.

I do not expect everyone to be modest, but lying at face value...

Click to expand...

Well, first i never said 1+1=0, is said along the lines of 0=1, and i never said 0.5i, is noted 0.50i, and i was only an abstraction to resemble the ethereal nature of superpositioning. It seems clear whatever you do read, you don't even attain the truth of what you arguing.

As for the thread topic, I've done online tests which are anywhere from 112 to 175. Am I bothered where I actually lie? Nope. It doesn't really matter what your exact IQ is if you don't make use of it. If someone has an IQ of 200 but doesn't bother to work, learn, think or do anything with it, what use is it?

Also, IQ tests often test your ability to think like the author, not logically. The 'What's the next number in this sequence' ones are fundamentally flawed. Any answer is correct.

Well, first i never said 1+1=0, is said along the lines of 0=1, and i never said 0.5i, is noted 0.50i, and i was only an abstraction to resemble the ethereal nature of superpositioning. It seems clear whatever you do read, you don't even attain the truth of what you arguing.

''Zero isn't an infinitesimally small number. It is zero. Thinking of it as an infinitesimally small number is giving it "size" which it does not have.''

\(1=(0.50i)(0.50i)= \sqrt{-1}\)

Here, 0.50 can be considered a value under 1, and yet also considered as not actually being real at all. So in a sense, this superposition is a proof that zero has some kind of value with another conjugate.

It really depends where or how you take the test; I could probably score 140 on one of those crummy true/false affairs scattered across the internet. In the UK (I thought I'd add that in because I'm not sure about the system in other countries) at school the whole year takes an IQ test. When I did it I came out with a score of 128, and therefore gained entry to the Gifted and Talented Youth program.

Now that's all well and good, but I know that my IQ cannot be anywhere near as high as that. Plus, the girl at my school who came out with the highest GCSE results in the year (straight A*s) didn't score highly enough to be accepted onto the scheme at all.

I think IQ is a valid term and that it can be measured. However, tests need to be universally standardised to be able to compare results properly.

Plus, the girl at my school who came out with the highest GCSE results in the year (straight A*s) didn't score highly enough to be accepted onto the scheme at all.

Click to expand...

No conflict.
Some people plod through, learn and pass exams, without having a high IQ.
High IQ doesn't relate to "application" - you can be as smart as hell but not actually apply yourself to learning "stuff" because it just doesn't interest you at the time = poor exam results.